User talk:Joshua Jonathan

@Joshua Jonathan this ip user ~2026-41329-79 is constatly threatening me in Talk:Pascal's triangle] on my old 2023 edits on History of calculus and many more and i am feeling depressed because of it .back then I was a young editor so I did reduced it to make it more efficent but my edits were been reverted by prominent editors back then and i dont actually wanted to remove any contribution on indian mathematicans I actually added more contribution about them according to reliable source and I only removed fringe theories like modern integration and derivative were known to indian mathematicans before newton and leibniz and I have shortend the articles. Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 13:57, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I would like to invite you to build article Draft: Rig-Veda-Sanhita, The Sacred Hymns Of The Brahmans and make comprehensive contribution to bringing the information to the public domain. I hope you will be happy to help. Thanks IND123456 (talk) 10:45, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan I wait for your reply. IND123456 (talk) 12:40, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

I have mentioned you in a Request for arbitration.

Link: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case

Oceanbed347 (talk) 06:51, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

TPS: see diff; it's already been removed diff. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 12:22, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Please refrain from making abusive or otherwise inappropriate edit summaries or comments. Your edit summary or comment may have been removed. Please communicate with civility and refrain from making personal attacks. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemmingweigh (talk • contribs) 14:44, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

@Hemmingweigh: you didn't sign your message, nor did you explain which edit-summary exactly you deem to be "abusive or otherwise inappropriate". Would you care to share that info with us? Thanks, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 15:23, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

There's more explanation at User talk:Oceanbed347#Arbitration request removed as premature diff:

I have come from Joshua Jonathan's talk page where I just left a warning about his uncivil attack in an edit summary, which is not the first: "looks more like sanitizing: removing info which does not sync with your personal views"

I was surprised to find there on his talk page a conversation where he apologizes to another editor for comments he made towards me in a talk page conversation. He never apologized to me. The other editor summarized his comments:

"Since you cited them in your WP:NORN responses, you're clearly already familiar with WP:ASPERSIONS, and presumably WP:CIVIL. You should then also be aware that comments like "you... and your pal" are WP:BATTLEGROUND, accusations of WP:DONTGETIT are aspersions as there's no consensus being ignored, accusations of those who disagree with you of being editors who push a biased narrative on Indian history and religion, and are uncomfortable with a presentation of scholarly information are aspersions, and characterizing another's arguments as Misleaing sophistry is clearly uncivil and borderline a personal attack. I understand that we disagree on the content, and my "what part of [this quote from SYNTH] is unclear to you?" didn't help matters, but we're all on the same team of trying to make the encyclopedia better. There's no need to personalize things further." See: July 2026.

You are absolutely correct that this editor's behavior is going unaddressed by admin. See the Hanuman talk page where he makes uncivil comments towards and asserts multiple times that I have a specific perspective, while transparently pushing the idea that any stories about Hanuman, a deity of a major world religion, is fiction.

This editor does make confusing edits such as changing wording that I have added and then using the same wording on the basis of neutrality and editing passages during an active talk page conversation after being asked not to, making it difficult for any admin to even understand the issues at hand. See his behavior on the NORN where he makes several uncivil comments and the Adi Shankara page where he engages in WP:TENDENTIOUS editing.

There is a lot more to say here in regards to WP:DISRUPTIVE, WP:GAMING, and more but due to time constraints I cannot summarize everything. In short, @Oceanbed347 you are not alone.

Some comments:

• looks more like sanitizing: diff, in repsonse to this edit diff, edit-summary deleted a sentence explaining the perspective of a scholar since the perspective provided is not about the topic of Hindu mythology - nor is the rest, so why remove this specific quote? See WP:CENSOR for "sanitizing", which is part of a policy. NB: the Hume-quote was removed after I checked the sourced and replaced puffery with a direct quote from Hume diff. The puffery was added here diff; it seems to me that the correction was less to the liking of this editor;
• summarized his comments [etc.] - to which I responded "agreed; I wasn't sure about my tone either." WP:TENDENTIOUS to leave that out;
• See the Hanuman talk page where he makes uncivil comments towards and asserts multiple times that I have a specific perspective, while transparently pushing the idea that any stories about Hanuman, a deity of a major world religion, is fiction. - no, "legend"; quote correctly, please. Unless you seriously want to argue that stories about Hanuman, the divine monkey, refer to an histrical 'person';
• This editor does make confusing edits such as changing wording that I have added and then using the same wording on the basis of neutrality - where, exactly?
• editing passages during an active talk page conversation after being asked not to - where, exactly?
• his behavior on the NORN where he makes several uncivil comments - which, exactly?
• the Adi Shankara page where he engages in WP:TENDENTIOUS editing - where, exactly?
• There is a lot more to say here in regards to WP:DISRUPTIVE, [...] - where, exactly?
• [...] WP:GAMING, [...] - where, exactly?
• and more - where, exactly?

That are 10 bullit-points which need clarification and diffs. WP:ASPERSIONS: "This page in a nutshell: Do not make accusations of misconduct without evidence." See also the DS-alert that I just posted at their talkpage. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 18:58, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

A mild stimulant is useful when you are being harassed about a dispute that went away six months ago. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:57, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

@Robert thanks; very kind and attentive to notice. I'll have the tea later, after having had some good nights sleep. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 01:56, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

I am considering reporting the user who filed the Request for Arbitration to Arbitration Enforcement. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:26, 1 August 2026 (UTC)